In response to MoreRings' comment:
In response to BabeParilli's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
In response to BabeParilli's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
2.) Tim Tebow -- Hoping to catch on in New England, he's posted a truly remarkable 0 rating. A total preseason 17.7 rating with only turnovers to show after roughly 5 quarters of play is hastening his departure. He's had more reps than Brady and Mallet combined and done less than 1/3 of either them alone.
Mallet's career passer rating is 5. LMAO
LOL. He has 12 career snaps in blowouts.
I mean, there are small samples, and then there is that: 12 snaps.
Brady had a zero rating last week .... after one play. Maybe they should have benched him for Tebow ... right?
Tebow has a few years of looking like he isn't good, full drives, games, weeks to make up for his incompetence.
And yet .... there he is ... behind Mallet on the depth chart ... and looking like a fan who walked into the game and tried to play with the real athletes.
Are we done yet?
Far from done.
You downplay Mallet's small NFL sample as indicative of his worth in the same breath you condemn TT's 7 pass pre-season game. LMAO
Tebow has had a "few years"??? His only significant playing time was in 2011 and you scoff at his taking a 1-4 team to the playoffs, going 7-4 as a starter and winning a game on the road at Pittsburgh in the playoffs. Yet you ball wash Mallet who has accomplished nothing.
Basically you have no leg to stand on in this and simply cling to spin in lieu of significant facts to make your case.
Playoff game was home in Denver. He is terrible. There is no doubt he is gone after preseason.
1.) Huh? How have I "ball-washed" Mallet?
I've said he is promising. I've said he has a tremendous arm. I don't think he is a starter right now. The only way that is going to even be seen is the unthinkable happens. But he looks like a guy who could run this offense as a backup: hence I find it unsurprising he is a second string QB at this point. I gauge this off of his track record as a pocket passer in college, and the way he has handled himself in training camp/preseason games. He's moved the football, he makes good throws. He looked last season like he might need to work on his decision making, but he also (so far) looks like he has come a bit of a way on that front.
2.) I do scoff at it. I scoff right in the face of it. It was a lot more time than Tebow deserved. Elway was right, the Denver offense was terrible under Tim Tebow, and he was not a QB to build a future around.
a.) Tebow did not "go" 7-4. The Denver Broncos went 7-4. That is a fact. Tim did not kick those FGs, he did not play defense. That is why records are for teams, and stats are for QBs.
b.) BTW, his record as a starter is 8-6. That is a fact.
c.) Denver compiled that record with a millstone of an offense that only scored 17.5 ppg (basically bottom of the league right there) while he was the QB. The offense decayed down the stretch, scoring just 13.5 points (not even NFL caliber) in the final half of the season with Tebow at QB. That is a fact.
d.) Statistically, Tebow is terrible. A 47 completion percent is terrible. A career rating after three seasons of 75 is terrible. Perhaps as a rookie it's passable because you are looking for improvemnet, but not as a second or third year player. After all the game time he has had, he has not shown the ability to run an efficient and effective offense. And he has regressed as he has gone on on all those fronts, getting worse with the more time he is out on the field playing. Again, a fact. And he has done so after being in the NFL for three seasons. Again a fact.
e.) Guess who else has a better record than that as a starter, as well as more 'game winning drives,' and all this anecdotal stuff you mention: Mark Sanchez. By your own criteria ... yours ... he should have remained behind Sanchez because Sanchez beats him on the only two "statistical" (and I use this word lightly because a team record is not a fixed QB statistic but a product of the team) categories you can ever mention with Tebow. Yet, you say he should have been given a chance over Sanchez, and was "shafted" as part of some big conspiracy.
3.) You are the one spinning things. 12 snaps spread over 4 games is enough to measure Mallet (how did Mallet even get involved here anyhow?) but Tim Tebow's failure to stick with two teams, and his long track record of poor play isn't enough, and he needs another chance?
That's not even fair debating ... do you even read what you are writing???? I'm not allowed to evaluate Tebow on three seasons of play in various capacities, and a full season of career starts because he wasn't given a "chance" ... but you can evaluate Mallet on 12 snaps spread over 4 games?
Let me explain 'spin' to you. It is the practice of presenting news or information in a wat that creates a favorable impression. So, pointing to Tebow's terrible numbers is a fact. They are not good. Pointing out how his offense was terrible is a fact. They did not score even an average amount of points. Pointing out how the Denver defense has been great is a fact. He has been traded and released by two teams, and is now fighting for an unlikely 3rd QB roster spot as a third string training camp guy on a third team is a fact. Those are all facts ... you cannot refute them.
Attempting to contextualize those by saying, well "Elway was breathing down his neck," or "he was benched/traded/cut because there was conspiracy to limit his playing time" are spin.
This is the NFL. Put on the big boy pants. In over a game of playing in New England he looks worse than anyone they've ever put out there in preseason, at least in my lifetime. He looked terrible. That is a fact.
Brining up the 12 snaps that Mallet has in a few spots in regular season games is nothing but undiluted spin. It does't even address Tebow's performance here, but instead deflects it to talk about something that is a far different scenario. No one is going to judge a QB on a few garbage time snaps with third team players. People will, in fact they play these games for this sole purpose, evaluate someone from preseason games. He's had more time playing than Brady and Mallet together, and has produced a 17.7 rating. In the same offense, in less time, Mallet has produced an 82.6 rating and actual touchdowns thrown. Really, he completed more passes than Tebow has all preseason in one drive.
You cannot answer that, but to bring up something that doesn't matter, like the four passes Mallet has thrown in garbage time games. Why not? Because you cannot answer the divergence with a fact. Nothing Tebow has shown so far this preseason is evidence he should even be mentioned with Mallet as part of this team's future. Certainly not his 17.7 rating, his delay of game penalties, etcetera.
At the end of the say, Babe, you make no points. You have no facts that support Tebow deserving anything. You have a record that his *team* compiled which you try to affix to him as something that somehow offsets the fact that he wasn't contributing to those wins, but was harming the team by turning the ball over too much, and making some stellar defensive efforts needlessly come down to the wire because he only scores on every 8th drive he is given. He's never been even a mediocre QB. And he hasn't shown enough promise for an NFL team to consider starting him.
At the end of the day, I've won this by the very fact of where he is. He is a third string guy in camp. Even if he got a job punt-protecting/running trick plays, he is not a starting QB, nor even a second string QB. He was cut by one team, traded for a bag of balls by another.
I know this hurts. It probably stings because you obviously have so much invested in him winning. But at the end of the day .... only Tebow winning a starting job somewhere can ever make you correct. You are basically arguing from the bottom of a dark hole my friend.
All of your conspiracy stories to "spin" this fact don't jibe with that one, finalistic, fundamental reality: he is not a starter, nor even a second string QB in the NFL.